I tend to think about things mathematically, so I have always thought of the dimensionality of a space to be the number of basis vectors require to form a spanning set. So, if time is not a valid dimension, I challenge you to prove linear dependence on the three lower spacial dimensions. If linear independence can be proven, then there must exist some set B of (four) 4-vectors which span some new (possibly non-euclidean) space, providing a dimensionality of four. Further, we know that that any arbitrary basis we choose may be represented as a linear combination B, so that any other fourth dimension chosen can be expressed in terms of B. If anyone figures out the dependence issue, please let me know.

On the site, yes they say time/duration is a dimension, but they do treat it as going from one state to another. For time yes they can say its a dimension, but I think you should only treat it as just a word. They have to say its a dimension to better explain the whole connection of the 10 dimension. Even if its not a dimension, I still see connecting every thing else.

you know , I always thought and I still do think that there is no time ... time is just a concept of the human mind , resulted in the moment we noticed changes around us . My theory is that , human mind concieved "time" beacause of its incapacity of understanding how things happen simoultaneously ... I believe that all happens HERE and NOW , as others may think it is a loop , but it isn't cause in order to have a loop , you have to detain the object of looping , in our case time , which I belive it doesn't exist ...

One of my physics teachers used to describe time in an interesting way.

He believed that wherever we talk about time there is some form of periodicity involved. For example the first concept of time known to humans might have been one day which is one rotation of the earth around its axis, thus a periodic process. Until today our only way to measure or percieve time is through some form of periodicity like the oscillation of a cesium atom.

I'm not sure if he was completely right on this but it may add to the argument that Einstein (the poster above me) stated, that "time is just a concept of the human mind".

Rob Bryanton wrote:As soon as you draw a line, you run the risk of people assuming that the first dimension is a line that we can see,

Did you ever consider creating an animation that reference the current dimensional space from the frame of a being existing on that dimension. In 3 dimensional space we can easily see length, width and depth. We realize that when we see an object in space we know that it should have each of 3 of those properties and if we travel along any one of those properties we change are relationship in space to it and as a result view it from a different reference.

I think that the book flatland is flawed. Because the creatures of flat land are able to determine 3 dimensions by looking at objects in their space. If that had some kind of sensory organs on the edge of their bodies they could detect other objects next to them and then travel around the object along length and width to determine its shape. The problem is that flatland would have to have 3 dimensions so they the sensory organs that came into contact with the other object would have to have some kind of depth for them to be able to touch.

Instead I think that 2 dimensional space is actually a line in 3 dimensional space and a 2 dimensional creature on that line would only see length and width of the object in front of him. If in 3 dimensions it is a string. Then the flatlander is able to determine the circumference of that string and its diameter but never be aware that the string has depth. He could be aware of another object in his space by traveling around it. It’s how we can have another 3 dimensional universe just within our arms reach rubbing up against ours but because we only have 3d coordinates to gauge our universe in we could theorize other 3d universes having similar properties but never see the one right next to ours until we move around it in the 4th coordinate.

all this stuff here is debatable because time and space being a continuum is nothing but theory. if time and space are not a continuum but entirely separate identities, then if we are to imagine a 4th dimension, it should be a space-dimension. if time is a diferent kind of dimension, existing along only one axis, then we could try to imagine a second temporal dimension, etc. but anyway, having more than 3 space-dimensions and 1 temporal dimension is just imaginable as an abstract idea, and you can't experience it, so it's just theory. it's like saying - my mom could be an astronaut... ok, yeah, sure, she could be, but for the time being, she isn't.

Time only has one of the properties required to be defined as a dimension, but lacks many.

All parameters of a system is not automatically defined as dimensions.

Any parametrical vector needs to have the same point of origin and be a refferance of measurement to be called a dimension.

You cannot say that you have added a 4th (real)dimension when you view the "snake image" of a persons lifespan just because you view multiple projections of that person at once.

You can actually say that time is the cause of multiple dimensions, but to allow time to be defined as a dimension we can only let its vectorial origin intersect with other timelines. And that doesn't really lead anywhere.

Your right time is a human concept,perception however,the moment that just passed does has purpose and meaning to the next.Look at it this way.One moment your boss comes and tells you to do something but you decide to ignore him.The next moment your boss comes back and fires you for not doing what he told you.Thus proving that the previous moment did have bearing to the next.Now being an intelligant person how would you classify the previous moment that lead to the current moment when you got fired?It's in the past but that past moment actions clearly affected the next.How would you classify the moment you were born.Did that have any bearing on the current moment?Of course it did.Humanity has to have a bearing point when referring to their life.Past,present and future.If you think about it why would you have to rearange atoms to visit the past.One has a memory that allows one to visit the past whenever they want.Just because one can't phyically go back doesn't mean you can't go back.And if your memory can go mentally back and recall a previous moment how would you refer to it.For human perception we call it the past.If their is no relevence for previous moments why does humanity have a memory.Their would be no point to it.

Yes, previous events LEAD to the present and the present events to the future. He wasn't saying that the past doesn't affect the present. What he meant was that what happened when "your boss fired you" was the atoms comprosing his existence and yours performed those actions and that those SAME atoms are now in a different location in spatial terms. The only reason your brain needs a memory to recall previous events is to help you servive. (If you couldn't recall when u got burned by fire or someone telling you not to touch fire, you would continually burn yourself) Only if at every possible moment atoms copy themselves and stay frozen in that particular point in time when they existed could one "Go back" and witness those atoms in that place, and those events occuring. And I'm just an 18 year-old High School Drop-out but as far as I know matter and the energy to sustain it cannot be spontaneously created. I know that's someones Law, lol. If those atoms were miraculously and spontaneously created at every moment AND for every possible outcome of every possible beginning where would all those atoms be contained if we cannot see them now? They would have to be each contained in an alternate reality and that reality would be newly created at the time in which that new outcome could have happened and also a place to contain all the past existences and future existences, which I have no idea, but would assume that's the theory behind the Multiverse. After I start rambling I have no perception of sentence structure sorry.

Okay, Besides ALL that. Lets say that even if by MAGIC we could travel back to a previous time. Let's say we go back six months in time.... Guess what? We would remain in the same spatial place and the earth would have rotated back halfway around the sun... We'd be stuck in space. And what if the entire universe itself is moving would be transported to another place inside the universe, HOLY SHIT. Could that be the key to traveling instantaneously across millions of lightyears???

Another thing, if we do eventually discover how to time travel, wouldn't the technicians and scientists want to do it faster and once they figure it out just go back in time and explain to themselves how to do it? Hence we would have had time travel already. Unless the people who actually invent it havn't been born yet. What if I wanted to live in my past. I would probably have to kill my past self and then I would have never been able to live long enough to GO to the future and would hence never have even been there to kill myself and if I wasn't dead I could have back to do it so I would have. But if I would have, I wouldn't have been born, WHoah, it's a continuous circle.

How do you explain premonitional dreams that one has and then actually experiences it a day,month or years later.
If past atoms don't exist which I'm not saying they do but how can one experience future events if those future atoms don't exist either?
As you say " (If) those atoms were miraculously and spontaneously created at every moment AND for every possible outcome of every possible beginning where would all those atoms be contained (if) we cannot see them now?
If is the key word.Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.Ask a blind person.Considering premonitional foresight of events that will accure
would support the fact that atoms or a type of atom we yet to discover may exist.Or that future events are in a different dimension or alternate reality that collides with ours when such events occur?
You are a very perceptive person but,I got to ask.Don't you perceive from
your perceptions that dropping out of school will hurt and affect your future events?Unless of course you don't have any money problems to consider.And even if you don't,lack of knowledge won't help you keep it.

Dee wrote:You are a very perceptive person but,I got to ask.Don't you perceive fromyour perceptions that dropping out of school will hurt and affect your future events?Unless of course you don't have any money problems to consider.And even if you don't,lack of knowledge won't help you keep it.

Yes dropping out of school was one of the dumbest things I could have possibly done, I didn't want to do it when it happened and I regret it now. I didn't have much choice in the matter I was kicked out of my fathers house junior year (last year) and I was going to lose all my credits so I decided to get my GED and I'm leaving for Basic Training in the Air Force in January. For Communications/Computer Systems Operations (nne of the hardest to enter positions)